Histon to Milton Shared Use
This narrow shared use path has been recently completed. Discussions as to whether it is adequate.
This section lists issues - problems on the street network and related matters.
Issues always relate to some geographical location, whether very local or perhaps city-wide.
You can create a new issue using the button on the right.
Listed issues, most recent first, limited to the area of Waterbeach Cycling Campaign:
This narrow shared use path has been recently completed. Discussions as to whether it is adequate.
Created by Heather Coleman // 2 threads
I subscribe to the Histon/Impington/Milton/Longstanton e-cops mailing list. We are now getting daily updates of crimes in the sector.
I'm noticing a lot of thefts of cycles parked at the various busway stops. Actually the busway stops are frankly useless unless you do park a bike there. The one at Swavesey is a good half a mile from the nearest end of the village. The one at Longstanton is similar. Most of Histon is a fair old hike on foot from Histon station. I suspect many who use the busway from further afield keep a bike at the Science Park or Orchard Park to avoid the traffic queues or to actually get to where they want to go without having to go all the way into the city and back out again.
Does anyone else have any anecdotal data on a) numbers of people who cycle at one or both ends of their busway journey and b) cycle theft statistics?
I'm seeing reports several times a week. At this rate, it makes using a bicycle to get to and from the busway unsustainable.
Created by Simon Nuttall // 2 threads
The Speedwatch scheme allows the public to get actively involved in monitoring the speed of vehicles travelling through their neighbourhood. It is used in areas where speeding has been identified as a priority at quarterly neighbourhood panel meetings. The scheme is run by the force alongside the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Road Safety Partnership. It is about educating motorists in the law in relation to speeding and monitoring any trends in speeding in neighbourhoods.
Volunteers are trained to use speed indicator devices which displays vehicle speed. The registered owner of any vehicle seen exceeding the speed limit is sent an advisory letter from their local neighbourhood policing team, explaining that speeding is unacceptable to the local community.
Created by Hester Wells // 1 thread
There is un-allocated money available from northern area s106 agreements for Cambridge and South cambs.
The council are currently looking for suggestions on how to spend it, within the requirements for the projects, which include the local transport policy priorities for walking, cycling and public transport.
The map is not accurate for the area covered: it certainly includes north Cambridge, a bit of Castle, and Histon, but the map was only up briefly. Once the minutes for the North Area Committee are published the definitive map will be available.
Created by Phil Lee // 0 threads
What to do about disgraceful decisions like this:
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Driver-ran-Cambridge-cyclist-mistakenly-thinking/story-24555273-detail/story.html ?
Clearly, the magistrate erred seriously in matters of both fact and law - all the prosecution had to prove was that the way he drives falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver.
Equally clearly, it did - nobody who could possibly be described as "competent and careful" would run over something the size of a cyclist without even being aware of it. He even admitted that he was talking on the phone at the time.
It staggers the mind to think what on earth the magistrates were thinking - or what with. Maybe they slept through the case, so didn't hear the prosecution, but were woken up for the defence (how there can be any defence for that is beyond me). Maybe they are dangerous drivers themselves, so sympathise with others of the same ilk instead of adequately discharging the responsibilities they are charged with? Mark Tyler also deserves complete contempt for not pleading guilty, and so preventing this gross miscarriage of justice. He should have been thanking his lucky stars that the police and CPS are so incompetent as not to pursue Dangerous driving, which it equally clearly was.
How can we get rid of incompetent idiots like Phil King (the lead magistrate in this case) who asserted that "there were “significant gaps” in the evidence". It is obvious to me that this dangerous idiot is perverting the course of justice by remaining in his position.
Presumably his colleagues on the bench conspired with him in this perversion - they could (and should) have over-ruled him unless they were parties to the conspiracy, surely?
The evidence was all there - there was a cyclist in front of him - whether the cyclist was upright or on the ground is irrelevant. Mark Tyler drove over him. Neither of those facts were in dispute. That is not the action of a competent and careful driver, and it should be beyond question that a person being in front of the vehicle is something which the driver should be expected to be aware of, which means the test in s3ZA of the Road Traffic Act is satisfied, and the accused is guilty.
The evidence also meets the test in s2A (Meaning of dangerous driving) so there is no excuse whatsoever for clearing him of even the lesser offence of careless driving. With driving like that, it is clear, beyond reasonable doubt, that he should not be in possession of a driving license, and the magistrates failed in their duty to relieve him of it.
As long as dangerous criminals like Phil King are allowed on the bench, the roads will never be safe for anyone.
As a footnote, from the report is appears that this dangerous character commutes from Whitchurch, Hampshire to Clifton Way, Cambridge. What length does that make his effective working day?
It's about 120 miles each way, so at least 4 hours driving (considerably more if in the "rush hour") on top of a full workday. It's utterly moronic to make a commute like that - when I worked anywhere near that far away, I commuted weekly. But this happened on a Wednesday.
Created by Philip Shore // 2 threads
With very limited maintenance on cyclepaths, should the local community:
- volunteer time and effort to increase maintainance eg cutting back hedgerows?
- if desired, how could volunteer effort be arranged?
Martin Lucas-Smith // 10 threads
Milton Road, like other main roads in the city, is a mix of typically bad bits of cycle infrastructure. There is considerable scope, possibly within the City Deal funding, to rework the whole streetscape to Dutch standards.
Created by Jim Chisholm // 4 threads
There is now an Area Action Plan for the Northern Fringe East
This is a huge area, and if the Anglia Water Works site is also redeveloped it brings big oportunities and associated risks
The Campaign needs to be involved
Martin Lucas-Smith // 31 threads
It is important that we engage with the candidates at each election, scrutinise their views, and press for their commitments to cycling.
Created by Rohan Wilson // 1 thread
Quote: para 2.77 "The Government supports the motorist and wants to see adequate parking provision for them...."
Question 2.16: Do you agree that parking policy should be strengthened to tackle on-street parking problems by restricting powers to set maximum parking standards?
Not a simple issue, but probably worth CCyC's commenting.
Created by Rohan Wilson // 1 thread
I've visited Riverside to Waterbeach with William Rayner of county cycling team. He's revising signage here and providing it along the St Ives corridor, with the old NCN 51 being renamed Regional Route 24 (blue patch). We've decided finally to continue to sign NCN 11 from Riverside Bridge to Waterbeach Station, and he's looking at suitable (hopefully temporary) wording to advise to follow NCN 51 to Bottisham for destinations beyond Waterbeach, which will hopefully eliminate misrouting those from outside the area.
Our inspection of existing signs showed that only one new signboard was provided on completion 5 years ago of Riverside Bridge. Signboards still send people via Green Dragon. Sustrans considers signage is an important part of any route project.
The intention is to sign Milton Country Park as a destination, not as part of the route, removing route signs within the park, and probably retaining Coles Road as the signed route through the village, though it would be much preferable to have improvements past the shops and the village green, pubs etc.
Retaining the route to Waterbeach as NCN will help keep the gap in people's awareness.
I am planning to contact again the landowner of the missing link between Bottisham Lock and Fen Road, Lode with a suggestion for a low-level route, southeast side of the Bottisham Lode floodbank which is the route of the public footpath, where signs forbid cycling. It might be considered more visually acceptable. All parish councils are for the route, including the one of which he is a member.
Created by Heather Coleman // 1 thread
I've had a letter from the council. Not sure if someone put a copy through my door as they knew I was interested in the Fen Road, Milton, as it's dated 30th June which is over two weeks ago.
I think "suface dressing" ie loose chippings, is a totally inappropriate treatment for a road which has not that much motor traffic and rather a lot of cycle traffic. The loose chippings will be a skid and physical hazard for cyclists for months to come.
Separate thread about this to separate from the main rail station thread..
The pedestrian/cycle underpass on Milton Road will be closed from August - December (currently) to facilitate rebuilding it for the busway extenstion.
Road works will be in place during this time.
Created by Hester Wells // 1 thread
Consultation on road markings and traffic signs at https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/traffic-signs-regulations-and-general-directions-2015
There are a number of things which I believe affect cyclists, see http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/dft-to-allow-better-signage-for-cyclists-including-removing-asl-lanes/016336
This is really a national issue, but didn't want to spam all users.
Created by Robin Heydon // 1 thread
The Guided Busway is a huge success. It carries many adults and youth to and from many destinations, a major destination being the Cambridge Regional College bus stop. Unfortunately, the volume of bicycle and pedestrian traffic along the line of the busway at this point probably wasn’t considered and is now causing problems. It will probably cause even more problems once the new Science Park Station is built at the far end of the busway.
Current Situation
When I started looking at this junction, I tried to ignore what was “built” and instead tried to observe how people moved through the junction. In the first diagram I’ve shown the main desire lines. Desire lines are where people actually move rather than those which engineers designed. For example, when crossing the access road to the college, from the busway, people walked in as straight a line as possible pretty much ignoring the supposed 90º toucan crossing.
Many people on bicycles don’t bother with the toucan but instead just wait for a gap between the traffic light phases and quickly scoot across. Many people ignore what has been designed and have found new, possibly better, ways through the junction - for example, creating a path from King Hedges Road over bare ground. This informal crossing obviously works, but is it safe? Do the bus drivers expect people to cross at this point?
There are many conflict points, some less bothersome than others. The two biggest problems are at the bus stop exit junction with the science park entrance, and between the toucan crossing and the brick surround of the gas supply for the area. When cycling there can be many people trying to cross the road, especially after the bus has stopped, or just before classes are due to start, all getting in your way. Of course, we are getting in their way too, and this isn’t helped by the poor sight lines.
I would therefore summarise that the problems are simply:
1. Severely limited space at the toucan crossing and busway crossing points.
2. Informal pedestrian crossing show junction isn’t working as desired.
3. Very narrow access to science park with poor sight lines.
Proposed Solution
First, we should always respect peoples desire lines. They are voting with their feet, it is obviously safe enough for them to do it day after day, and they have left plenty of evidence that it works by wearing down the grass. So we should make this a proper pedestrian route. This actually has two benefits: it moves a lot of the pedestrian traffic to the west side of the busway stop reducing the number of people at the science park entrance, and it allows a more “directed” path to the north side of that brick building.
Second, we should separate the CRC traffic and guided busway traffic as much as possible at the CRC junction. The busway traffic should follow their natural desire line which is straight on. There are wide turning splays for buses to access the busway from the CRC, yet no buses do this. We should remove them and make a straight on toucan in line with the busway. The CRC traffic would be given their own toucan on the north side of the brick building. Some of the existing railing (cycle parking) here may need to be removed, and the car stop line pushed back a car length or so. The space between the car stop line and the new toucan could usefully become an advanced cycle box.
Third, we should build a proper segregated footway to the north of the cycle track that links to the existing footway going to the “new” toucan. This would be built similar to the Coton path such that pedestrian traffic would be encouraged to seek the higher and safer ground.
Forth, we should straighten the line for access from the science park to the busway. The current facility bends away from the busway crossing, is very narrow, and limits the flow. I’ve seen times when people are queuing cross the busway to travel through this gate. On the south side, the highly restrictive chicane should be removed. People happily cross the busway at multiple points without problems, as here the buses are moving very slowly as they approach the station.
Lastly, we should alter the phasing of the traffic lights. A simple desire for people on bicycle is to wait as little time as possible, but we take very little time to cross a road. Therefore, I would suggest that bicycles are given a green light between every car phase, but only for a few seconds. They should also be given a green light whenever the busway is given a green light. The individual phases may need to be lengthened slightly, say from 25 seconds to 30 seconds to maintain the “capacity”, but the advantages it gives to bicycles would be huge. Also, the pedestrian crossing could be changed to a zebra crossing. This route would then become preferable to the slower toucan crossing further pulling people away. It would also allow for a much more pedestrian focused environment around what should be highly walkable area.
Created by Colin Bell // 1 thread
Has there been any improvement in the "new" NCN 11 route from Waterbeach to Lode since last summer? Last time I went that way I had to wheel the bike across fields and carry it over two or three stiles.
Any information, including a forecast date when a proper route is likely to be built, welcome. Thanks.
Created by Richard Jennings // 1 thread
Traffic queuing on Milton Road between Cowley Park Road and the on-road cycle lane south west of Trinity Hall Farm Ind Est blocks cycles getting past.
Created by Richard Moss // 2 threads
Discharge of Conditions from outline application S/0179/13/OL regarding cycle parking for 4600 sq m building on Cambridge Science Park
Created by Richard Moss // 1 thread
An umbrella issue for discussion of general matters relating to reviewing planning applications in the city and south cambs.
Created by Heather Coleman // 3 threads
This is a general use issue so people can create specific threads about shared or dual use pavements where mainly the paint is so worn that they sometimes get abuse or are told off for riding where it's perfectly legal to do so.
I'm not a great fan of these facilities, and totally subscribe to their use being 100% optional, but there are places where they are useful for some or many, for example a short stretch to avoid having to turn right twice, or to be able to make a turn at traffic lights rather than in the middle of an unsignalled area.
Created by Hester Wells // 5 threads
Issues surrounding the effect on-street car-parking has on road space, pinch points, car-dooring, interruption of cycle lanes etc.
Created by Heather Coleman // 4 threads
I'm creating this as a general "issue" in the hope that people will put different threads here for problems they have with building sites, generally associated with deliveries. Listing those problems and any action or complaints they've taken personally, and also asking how further complaints can be made.
I can't help feeling we should be talking to the council about making it a condition of planning permission that deliveries that either require "odd" movements of HGVs eg, reversing and taking ages doing so, or parking on the street eg while delivering scaffolding, should not take place during "rush hour", especially on roads that are busy and are major cycle routes.
Campaign for a 300m section of the unguided busway between Milton Road and the pedestrian and cyclists access at the end of Nuffield Close to be built as a road, providing a more direct access for lorries and cars to the trading estate.
Nuffield Road’s residential section should then be cut-off for motorised through traffic just past Discovery Way, turning the first part of Nuffield Road into a residential close.
Petition: http://iitm.be/ChestertonTrafficReduction
Picture Gallery: http://iitm.be/NuffieldRoad
Area Committees are a joint meeting attended by both city and county councillors. They decide on planning issues in the area, but also have a role in the allocation of community development money from S106 contributions. They offer an opportunity to engage with multiple councillors at once, through the Open Forum section and speaking on specific Agenda items. The North Area's website is here: https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/north-area-committee
Speaking at these meetings is a good way of making your feelings on matters the councils control public.
This map shows all issues, whether points, routes, or areas:
The most popular issues, based on the number of votes:
Martin Lucas-Smith // 29 threads
Proposed route along the rail corridor through Cambridge, part of which is in the Cambridge Local Plan.
Created by Rohan Wilson // 1 thread
I've visited Riverside to Waterbeach with William Rayner of county cycling team. He's revising signage here and providing it along the St Ives corridor, with the old NCN 51 being renamed Regional Route 24 (blue patch). We've decided finally to continue to sign NCN 11 from Riverside Bridge to Waterbeach Station, and he's looking at suitable (hopefully temporary) wording to advise to follow NCN 51 to Bottisham for destinations beyond Waterbeach, which will hopefully eliminate misrouting those from outside the area.
Our inspection of existing signs showed that only one new signboard was provided on completion 5 years ago of Riverside Bridge. Signboards still send people via Green Dragon. Sustrans considers signage is an important part of any route project.
The intention is to sign Milton Country Park as a destination, not as part of the route, removing route signs within the park, and probably retaining Coles Road as the signed route through the village, though it would be much preferable to have improvements past the shops and the village green, pubs etc.
Retaining the route to Waterbeach as NCN will help keep the gap in people's awareness.
I am planning to contact again the landowner of the missing link between Bottisham Lock and Fen Road, Lode with a suggestion for a low-level route, southeast side of the Bottisham Lode floodbank which is the route of the public footpath, where signs forbid cycling. It might be considered more visually acceptable. All parish councils are for the route, including the one of which he is a member.
As the bridleway crosses Milton Road, it swaps sides of the busway, so most pedestrians and cyclists want to cross diagonally. However the toucan crossing only protects people crossing Milton Road. It doesn't stop busway traffic.
This is confusing and dangerous. When the road traffic stops at red lights, and the Toucan crossing turns green, it feels very safe to cross the busway. Yet buses can come from three directions (busway west, busway east, Milton Road south) at speeds of 30 mph.
Cyclists in particular are tempted to cross diagonally from north west to south east. Last week I saw a near accident.
Created by David Green // 1 thread
My employer is planning to relocate from central cambridge to the Cambridge Business Park (near Waterbeach). There is currently no decent cycle (or footpath!) access to this business park which avoids riding along the A10. I am a confident cyclist but I am not looking forward to riding to work along sections of the A10.
Are there any plans for cycle route construction which the campaign can, perhaps, help accelerate?
Created by Robin Heydon // 9 threads
The A14 is a very hostile, dangerous road for cycling.
Improvements to it, as well as broader changes to the national framework for cyclist crossings of major roads, are needed.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 10 threads
Milton Road, like other main roads in the city, is a mix of typically bad bits of cycle infrastructure. There is considerable scope, possibly within the City Deal funding, to rework the whole streetscape to Dutch standards.
Vehicles are continually abusing cyclists who use the road here because the bus lane on the other side forces the carriageway to be narrow.
Although there is the cycleway, it has the usual problems of loss of priority at sideroads, bins in the way, people going in and out of driveways, etc.
Created by Robin Heydon // 2 threads
The Landbeach Parish Council would like the bridgeway from Landbeach to Cambridge to be upgraded to a cycleway.
Created by velocipedus@gmail.com // 12 threads
Project Orange is an attempt develop our general strategy during the year 2013.
It involves
1) Should Cambridge Go Dutch (or Copenhagenize)
2) A more assertive stance in our interactions with agencies: Demanding of them to make feasible what seems infeasible
3) focus on a regional area 10 miles (15 km) around Cambridge and a dartboard network structure to connect villages,
4) the development of a Bicycle Infrastructure Assessment Tool (BIAC) which will allow us to grade and praise provision
5) Priority over sideroads as part of a Dutch-style approach
5) Development of Visualisation Tools for major projects (Chisholm Trail, Newnham to Newmarket Rd, Mitcham's Corner)
Martin Lucas-Smith // 4 threads
London Cycling Campaign has reorientated its policy towards a 'Go Dutch' approach.
This aims to learn from best practice abroad rather than continuing with the 'hierarchy of provision' that, in 20 years in the UK, has arguably failed to deliver meaningful change.
This is an overarching issue for conceptual discussion of this issue.
Created by Colin Bell // 1 thread
Has there been any improvement in the "new" NCN 11 route from Waterbeach to Lode since last summer? Last time I went that way I had to wheel the bike across fields and carry it over two or three stiles.
Any information, including a forecast date when a proper route is likely to be built, welcome. Thanks.
Created by David Earl // 4 threads
There are some evil short grey posts on the busway cycleway that are really hard to see in the dark. I have heard of a number of people hitting them with disastrous consequences
Created by Cllr Ian Manning // 1 thread
The County appointed an officer back in June to review parking policy across the County, starting with the City.
Created by Roxanne (CEO) // 1 thread
A Camcycle member is looking at starting a local campaign group with the aim of getting a cycleway to connect the villages of Horningsea and Waterbeach along the B1047.
Please share your ideas and advice for the route here.
Over the past couple of years of regularly cycling between Waterbeach and Cambridge on NCN11 I have noticed that the path between Waterbeach and Baits Bite Lock is in really bad repair and is getting gradually worse. I have been in touch with the council to ask them to repair it, and they told me that as far as they are concerned the path is only a footpath, and they have no obligation to maintain it to a standard suitable for bikes. Sustrans tells me they have no responsibility for maintaining that section of the route, and that the council should be responsible for it.
It seems absurd to allow the path to fall into total disrepair, but at the moment it doesn't seem like anyone recognises any obligation for its upkeep.
I am happy to go out occasionally with some secateurs and chop off the more annoying bits of greenery, but the path needs resurfacing and that feels a bit beyond me!
Does anyone have any experience with this sort of problem? Have they come across it on other sections of the NCN?
Created by Matthew // 2 threads
On 1 January 2026, historic routes in England that aren’t properly recorded will be lost to the public forever. We are looking for people to volunteer their time to help us identify and register these routes before it is too late.
Created by Phil Lee // 0 threads
What to do about disgraceful decisions like this:
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Driver-ran-Cambridge-cyclist-mistakenly-thinking/story-24555273-detail/story.html ?
Clearly, the magistrate erred seriously in matters of both fact and law - all the prosecution had to prove was that the way he drives falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver.
Equally clearly, it did - nobody who could possibly be described as "competent and careful" would run over something the size of a cyclist without even being aware of it. He even admitted that he was talking on the phone at the time.
It staggers the mind to think what on earth the magistrates were thinking - or what with. Maybe they slept through the case, so didn't hear the prosecution, but were woken up for the defence (how there can be any defence for that is beyond me). Maybe they are dangerous drivers themselves, so sympathise with others of the same ilk instead of adequately discharging the responsibilities they are charged with? Mark Tyler also deserves complete contempt for not pleading guilty, and so preventing this gross miscarriage of justice. He should have been thanking his lucky stars that the police and CPS are so incompetent as not to pursue Dangerous driving, which it equally clearly was.
How can we get rid of incompetent idiots like Phil King (the lead magistrate in this case) who asserted that "there were “significant gaps” in the evidence". It is obvious to me that this dangerous idiot is perverting the course of justice by remaining in his position.
Presumably his colleagues on the bench conspired with him in this perversion - they could (and should) have over-ruled him unless they were parties to the conspiracy, surely?
The evidence was all there - there was a cyclist in front of him - whether the cyclist was upright or on the ground is irrelevant. Mark Tyler drove over him. Neither of those facts were in dispute. That is not the action of a competent and careful driver, and it should be beyond question that a person being in front of the vehicle is something which the driver should be expected to be aware of, which means the test in s3ZA of the Road Traffic Act is satisfied, and the accused is guilty.
The evidence also meets the test in s2A (Meaning of dangerous driving) so there is no excuse whatsoever for clearing him of even the lesser offence of careless driving. With driving like that, it is clear, beyond reasonable doubt, that he should not be in possession of a driving license, and the magistrates failed in their duty to relieve him of it.
As long as dangerous criminals like Phil King are allowed on the bench, the roads will never be safe for anyone.
As a footnote, from the report is appears that this dangerous character commutes from Whitchurch, Hampshire to Clifton Way, Cambridge. What length does that make his effective working day?
It's about 120 miles each way, so at least 4 hours driving (considerably more if in the "rush hour") on top of a full workday. It's utterly moronic to make a commute like that - when I worked anywhere near that far away, I commuted weekly. But this happened on a Wednesday.
Created by cobweb // 1 thread
http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/press-releases/dft-press-20121109a
A DfT consultation to see whether speed limits on single carriageways should be introduced for HGV's. This will clearly have implications for cycle safety.
Created by Roxanne (CEO) // 3 threads
The government has announced it will hold a consultation on the introduction of the battery-powered scooters to British roads.
What are the implications for people cycling, walking and scooting?
What is Camcycle's position/policy about e-scooters?
What general measures (publicity, fairs, web activity, leaflets, brochures, campaign manifestos) can we undertake to promote cycling in Cambridge in the most general sense?
This issue is a discussion area for proposals and discussion on creating general-purpose material and the approach that can be taken to promote cycling, and the difficult question of how this is balanced against difficulties that cyclists face in practice.
This issue is not for discussion of specific problematic infrastructure or helmet issues, or anything like that.
Created by Al Storer // 2 threads
Cycling and Walking provision at Cambridge Science Park is poor. Lets try and get it fixed
Created by Anna Williams – Head of Campaigns & Engagement // 2 threads
Camcycle's time and energy is consistently taken up removing exclusionary barriers (e.g. Biomedical Campus, A14 active travel bridges, Warren Road). We need to consider long-term ways to prevent new barriers going in and remove existing ones which prevent people of all ages and abilities cycling.
Created by Paul Bearpark // 1 thread
Objections to U&Cs outline planning application need to be submitted by 10 April. There seem to be some interesting ideas for improving cycling infrastructure but a lot that could be improved upon.
Created by Heather Coleman // 1 thread
I've noticed a few of these around Cambridge where there's a "no through road" sign but it's a through road for cyclists and pedestrians. As there's a post already, if the council had a ready-made stock of plates saying "except cycles", "except pedestrians", a single operative could affix the plate below the sign to made it correct. It is highly deceptive and not serving those using non-motorised transport if they go the long way round not realising they can get through a quicker route.
Created by velocipedus@gmail.com // 6 threads
How can we support the growth of local initiatives ?
How can we overcome the division urban and rural cycling?
Would it be useful to establish a network of regional groups?
Could such a network become an interesting partner for the county planners?
Would politicians be able to hear us better if we speak from a position of regional awareness, a a group of groups?
Would it help the elected to understand that things are changing on our roads?
Could such a network support constituent groups, facilitate exchange between these groups, become a more important player in the national context?
Could such a network attract its own funding?
What would be a good name for such a grouping (NAMES ARE IMPORTANT)
We have CTC, Ely, A10 Corridor, Martin T thinking about something in Bury St Edmunds, "Routes around Chatteris", Wisbech forum (set up by the County), - anything else ?